Chris Richardson

“Sound policymaking requires good evidence, but it also requires judgment, transparency and accountability, as often what we are searching for is the least worst solution to issues that confront us. I will continue consulting nonpartisan Legislative Council staff, research 9fellows, state auditors, economists, technical experts, affected industries, local governments and Colorado’s universities, including experts at CSU Extension, before making major policy decisions. Additionally, I have used the legislative interim periods to tour facilities, attend conferences, and short academy offerings.

Advisory groups should include practitioners with firsthand experience, not solely academics, agency officials or advocacy organizations. A transportation engineer, rural physician, farmer, small-business owner or county commissioner may identify practical consequences that a statewide model overlooks. Minority viewpoints and credible conflicting evidence should also be considered rather than excluded

For significant legislation, I support clearly identifying the data, assumptions, projected costs and expected outcomes underlying the proposal. When evidence is incomplete, lawmakers should acknowledge that uncertainty. Pilot programs, sunset reviews and measurable performance standards can allow Colorado to test an approach before expanding it statewide.

After implementation, agencies should report whether a policy accomplished its stated purpose, what it cost and whether it produced unintended consequences. Programs that do not deliver measurable results should be changed or ended.

Scientific findings should inform public policy, but science does not independently decide questions involving constitutional rights, affordability, personal liberty or competing public priorities. Evidence should illuminate those tradeoffs so elected representatives, and ultimately the public, can make informed and accountable decisions.”

“Agriculture is $47 billion industry fundamental to Colorado’s economy, food security and rural heritage. Supporting it begins with listening to producers and advancing solutions that work under real-world conditions.

I support strengthening agricultural research and CSU Extension programs focused on drought-resistant crops, soil health, livestock health, precision agriculture, water efficiency and lower-cost alternatives to imported fertilizer and other high-cost inputs. Public research should be conducted transparently and translated into practical tools that producers of every size can use.

Colorado should also streamline approval of proven water-saving technology, support irrigation modernization, expand water storage and improve drought forecasting. Conservation programs should remain voluntary, locally driven and incentive-based. Protecting natural resources cannot mean regulating productive agriculture out of existence or transferring rural water without regard for the communities that depend upon it.

We should measure proposed agricultural regulations against their economic and operational effects, including cumulative costs. Farmers should have meaningful representation before new mandates are adopted. They are the on-the-ground experts in conservation practices. Policies must also protect private-property and senior water rights.

Finally, innovation requires infrastructure. Rural broadband, reliable and affordable energy, passable roads, agricultural workforce development and accessible veterinary services all help producers adopt new technologies and remain competitive.

My objective is to ensure we never dictate farming practices from Denver. It is to connect sound research with producer experience, remove unnecessary barriers and give Colorado farmers and ranchers the tools and flexibility to produce more efficiently while preserving our land and water for future generations.”

“Colorado should welcome responsible investment in artificial intelligence and data infrastructure, but growth must not force families, farmers and existing businesses to subsidize the industry’s substantial electricity, water and infrastructure demands.

Data centers can bring construction investment, tax revenue and high-skilled employment. They can also require enormous amounts of power, create new transmission costs, consume water and affect neighboring communities through noise, traffic and land-use changes. The proper balance is growth that pays its own way and respects local priorities.

I support transparent utility proceedings requiring data-center developers to bear the costs of the generation, transmission and grid upgrades needed to serve them. Long-term contracts, appropriate financial sureties and protective rate structures should prevent existing customers from being left with stranded costs if a project closes or uses less power than projected.

Developers must disclose anticipated energy and water demands before approval. Colorado should encourage, but not prescribe, a diverse supply of reliable power, including natural gas, advanced nuclear, renewables and storage. Projects using reclaimed water, closed-loop systems, air cooling, waste-heat recovery or other resource-saving technologies may merit incentives when benefits can be independently verified.

County and municipal governments must retain meaningful land-use authority. Local residents deserve early notice and a voice regarding water availability, noise, emergency services, roads and community impacts. Local governments are best positioned to ensure objective impacts to their communities are fully mitigated.

Colorado does not need either a blanket prohibition or a taxpayer-funded giveaway. We need clear rules, accurate information, local control and enforceable protections ensuring that innovation benefits Colorado without shifting its costs onto everyone else.”

“The premise of this question illustrates why policymakers must verify the facts before prescribing solutions. Colorado has not experienced one continuous measles outbreak since March 2025. Instead, the state experienced several introductions and clusters. The best-documented outbreak, linked to an infectious traveler passing through Denver International Airport, ended in July 2025. Later cases represent separate transmission events.

While measles is highly contagious, vaccination provides strong protection. I support making recommended vaccines readily accessible while preserving informed consent. Patients and parents deserve complete, understandable information about benefits, risks, alternatives and individual circumstances, and the freedom to ask questions without being dismissed or coerced.

We must also recognize the unfortunate but understandable erosion of public trust following Colorado’s handling of COVID-19. Changing guidance, inconsistent restrictions, insufficient acknowledgment of uncertainty and troubling issues subsequently examined through congressional hearings caused many Americans to question traditional public-health information sources. That trust cannot be restored by demanding compliance or dismissing legitimate concerns. It must be rebuilt carefully and deliberately through transparency, humility and accountability.

Public-health officials should clearly distinguish established evidence from evolving judgment, disclose uncertainties and competing findings, explain policy changes and acknowledge mistakes. Data and supporting assumptions should be publicly available whenever possible.

Rural communities also need practical access to vaccination, testing and treatment through local health departments, clinics, hospitals and pharmacies. During an outbreak, I support rapid testing, accurate exposure notifications, focused protection for vulnerable people and close coordination with local officials, not an automatic return to inflexible statewide mandates.

Effective public health depends upon trust. Deep factual analysis, honest communication, informed consent, individual responsibility and locally tailored action provide the strongest foundation for protecting both public health and personal liberty.”

“As an engineer and former school board member, I recognize that science literacy is both increasingly important and it involves more than memorizing conclusions. Students should understand how evidence is gathered, how hypotheses are tested, how uncertainty is measured and how new findings can refine earlier conclusions.

Colorado’s K–12 standards should place greater emphasis on the scientific method, statistics, probability, experimental design, source evaluation and the difference between correlation and causation. Students should learn to examine data, identify weak assumptions and distinguish peer-reviewed research from unsupported claims or persuasive online content. These reasoning skills are critical in all areas of life regardless of a student’s eventual career path.

Hands-on learning is especially valuable. Laboratory experiments, agricultural science, engineering projects, environmental fieldwork, computer science and career-and-technical education help students see how scientific principles solve practical problems. Partnerships with farms, hospitals, utilities, manufacturers, universities and skilled-trades employers can connect classroom learning with Colorado careers.

Standards should also teach students how to discuss scientific disagreements constructively. Science advances through questioning and testing, not appeals to political authority. Students should be able to consider competing explanations, evaluate the strength of evidence and revise their views without treating disagreement as hostility.

Teachers need strong subject-matter preparation, quality instructional materials and access to continuing education. At the same time, curriculum decisions should remain transparent to parents and accountable to locally elected school boards.

Our goal should not be to tell students what to think about every contested issue. It should be to equip them to ask good questions, understand evidence, recognize uncertainty and reach defensible conclusions. Those abilities will produce better scientists, more capable workers and better-informed citizens.”